title: Clinical outcomes of hemiarthroplasty and biological resurfacing in patients aged younger than 50 years.
abstract: BACKGROUND
  Total shoulder arthroplasty as a treatment for glenohumeral degenerative joint disease is well accepted but has been less predictable with regard to outcomes and durability in a younger aged population, typically aged younger than 50 years. This younger population has a greater potential for glenoid component loosening. This has led surgeons to perform hemiarthroplasty or hemiarthroplasty with biological resurfacing of the glenoid in an effort to avoid the potential problems with a polyethylene glenoid and obtain durable and acceptable results for these patients.
  
  
  METHODS
  The study included 44 patients, with 23 undergoing hemiarthroplasty alone and 21 undergoing hemiarthroplasty with biological resurfacing of the glenoid. All patients were aged younger than 50 years. Preoperative diagnoses, comorbidities, demographics, and range of motion were collected. Preoperative and postoperative radiographs were obtained. Preoperative and postoperative objective scoring measures (Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation, American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score, visual analog scale, Simple Shoulder Test, Constant-Murley) were used.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Mean follow-up was 3.8 years for the hemiarthroplasty group and 3.6 years for the biological resurfacing group. Six patients in the hemiarthroplasty and 12 patients in the biological resurfacing group were considered failures due to revision surgery or an American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons score <50. The hemiarthroplasty group had significantly better visual analog scale and Single Assessment Numeric Evaluation scores.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  There was a significant failure rate in the hemiarthroplasty and the biologic resurfacing groups compared with results in the literature. Improved outcomes and lower failure rates were observed in the hemiarthroplasty group compared with the biological resurfacing group in this study.
authors.affiliation: Division of Sports Medicine, Department of Orthopaedics, Naval Medical Center Portsmouth, Portsmouth, VA, USA.
authors.forename: L C D R James
authors.initials: LC
authors.lastname: Hammond
authors.forename: Emery C
authors.initials: EC
authors.lastname: Lin
authors.forename: Daniel P
authors.initials: DP
authors.lastname: Harwood
authors.forename: Tristan W
authors.initials: TW
authors.lastname: Juhan
authors.forename: Eric
authors.initials: E
authors.lastname: Gochanour
authors.forename: Emma L
authors.initials: EL
authors.lastname: Klosterman
authors.forename: Brian J
authors.initials: BJ
authors.lastname: Cole
authors.forename: Gregory P
authors.initials: GP
authors.lastname: Nicholson
authors.forename: Nikhil N
authors.initials: NN
authors.lastname: Verma
authors.forename: Anthony A
authors.initials: AA
authors.lastname: Romeo
mesh_terms: D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D005260:Female; D005500:Follow-Up Studies; D062785:Hemiarthroplasty / Q000379:methods*; D006801:Humans; D007595:Joint Prosthesis; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010003:Osteoarthritis / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D011474:Prosthesis Design; D016059:Range of Motion, Articular; D020127:Recovery of Function; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D012785:Shoulder Joint / Q000503:physiopathology / Q000601:surgery*; D013997:Time Factors; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D055815:Young Adult
keywords: Hemiarthroplasty; Level III; Retrospective Cohort; Treatment Study; biological resurfacing; glenohumeral arthritis; lateral meniscal allograft